Public Review to Begin for Mayor’s ‘City of Yes’ Housing Plan, as Affordability Details Emerge

posted in: News | 0

Introduced in September as the third column in Adams’ City of Yes initiative—following separate proposals related to climate and commercial businesses—the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is a broad plan that seeks to tackle the housing crisis with various zoning changes.

Chris Janaro

Supporters turned out Wednesday for a rally outside City Hall to kick of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity.

Mayor Eric Adams’ key initiative to address the city’s housing crisis will soon enter the public review process after long-awaited details on affordability levels were announced on Thursday.

Introduced in September as the third column in Adams’ City of Yes Initiative—following separate proposals related to climate and commercial businesses—the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is a broad plan that seeks to tackle the housing crisis with various zoning changes.

One component would let developers build about 20 percent more housing than otherwise allowed—so long as the extra units are income-restricted.

In order to qualify for the density bonus, dubbed the Universal Affordability Preference (UAP), the additional units need to be permanently affordable to New Yorkers earning an average of 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI)—about $76,260 for a family of three. 

That targets a lower income threshold than the city’s existing Voluntary Inclusionary (VIH) Housing program, in which developers in certain neighborhoods can build more in exchange for including a portion of apartments for households at 80 percent AMI, or $101,680 for a three-person household.

“We believe that we can and should do better than the current 80 percent AMI,” Department of City Planning Director Daniel Garodnick said at a press conference in September when first unveiling the plan. 

Additionally, the UAP would allow the “deep affordability” option within Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH)—a program passed under former Mayor de Blasio, which requires upzoned projects include a portion of income-restricted units—to be implemented on its own, without needing to be paired with other MIH options at higher AMI levels. The deep affordability option mandates that 20 percent of a development’s units be accessible to New Yorkers earning 40 percent of the AMI, or roughly $50,840 for a family of three.

In her most recent State of the City address, Council Speaker Adrienne Adams called specifically for that change. In a statement Thursday, she praised the administration’s latest proposal, which will eventually come before the Council for a vote.

“The affordability levels in the new text for the Zoning for Housing Opportunity (ZHO) better reflect the growing need for prioritizing deeper affordability, and I welcome these changes,” she said. “Once the citywide text amendment makes its way through the public review process, the Council looks forward to fully reviewing it.”

“Averaging at 60% AMI IS noteworthy!” said Rachel Fee, executive director of the New York Housing Conference, in a post on the X platform formerly known as Twitter. 

“If Albany lands somewhere higher on 421a income levels, this will be very meaningful in both creating more affordable housing and getting deeper affordability,” she added in her post, referring to a lapsed property tax benefit for developers to encourage affordable housing construction. 421-a expired in June 2022, and discussions around its revival, along with potential tenant protections like good cause, have dominated policy discussions at the state level this year.

However, some think the City of Yes plan could have embraced even deeper affordability.

In an interview with City Limits, Emily Goldstein, director of organizing and advocacy at the Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development (ANHD), said 60 percent of AMI still excludes many of the people who most need affordable housing in the city. 

“We’re not inherently opposed to development in general. But it’s something I do think it’s important to distinguish between,” she said. “Are we talking about an affordable housing program? Or are we talking about a general housing supply program? And the high-density piece of this is more the latter than the former.”

Last year, just 1.41 percent of apartments across the five boroughs were available to renters, the lowest rate in decades, the NYC Housing and Vacancy Survey found—and homes were especially scarce for the lowest income households, with just 0.39 percent of units renting for under $1,100 vacant and available in 2023.

Other critics of the mayor’s plan voiced concerns over a one-size-fits-all approach to creating more homes across the five boroughs.

“They’re taking a large text amendment that would change zoning, not realizing that it doesn’t fit every single community throughout the city,” said City Councilmember Joann Ariola, representing District 32 in Queens, which includes the Howard Beach and South Ozone Park neighborhoods. “Why didn’t they make this into smaller pieces so that we could vote on them separately to see what would fit which community?” 

The public review process for City of Yes expedites the typical public review timeline by having borough presidents and community boards weigh in simultaneously. They’ll have two months to examine the proposal and suggest changes. 

After that, there is a brief period for further adjustments before the plan reaches the City Planning Commission for a binding vote before going before the City Council, where they too can approve, modify, or deny the proposal, which is anticipated to happen before the end of the year, according to sources at the Department of City Planning (DCP).

The mayor has pitched his plan as an effort to build “a little more housing in every neighborhood,” noting inequities in new development across the city.

“There are a lot of neighborhoods that have frankly been not doing any development and that have been allowed by the current state of affairs to remain very exclusionary,” said Goldstein.

“We do think that there are a lot of aspects of this proposal, more for lower-density neighborhoods, that will help to combat that issue and ensure a more equitable distribution of development in the city,” she added. 

In addition to the UAP component, the City of Yes aims to address the city’s housing crisis by more easily allowing conversions of underused non-residential spaces, such as vacant offices, into housing, and reintroducing mixed-use zoning to enable apartments above businesses in low-density areas.

Additionally, the plan seeks to eliminate mandatory off-street parking requirements for new residential projects, reducing costs and increasing housing production. It would legalize accessory dwelling units (ADUs) such as garage conversions, and ease zoning limitations for faith-based organizations and universities to more easily convert their properties into homes.

DCP sources indicate that the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity will enter formal public review toward the end of this month.

To reach the reporter behind this story, contact Chris@citylimits.org. To reach the editor, contact Jeanmarie@citylimits.org

Want to republish this story? Find City Limits’ reprint policy here.

The US and UK restrict the trade of Russian-origin metals

posted in: Politics | 0

By FATIMA HUSSEIN (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and U.K. will begin restricting the trade of new Russian-origin metals — including aluminum, copper and nickel — on global metal exchanges and in derivatives trading.

The announcement is meant to follow up on the Group of Seven nations’ commitment in February “to reduce Russia’s revenues from metals” as its invasion into Ukraine has dragged on for more than two years.

Russia is a key exporter of metals like aluminum, steel and titanium — but British and American officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to preview the announcement, said the economic impact from the ban would be negligible for consumers and producers.

The intent is to limit Russia’s revenues from metals, they say, as metals have earned the nation $40 billion in the past two years, according to British officials.

“Our new prohibitions on key metals, in coordination with our partners in the United Kingdom, will continue to target the revenue Russia can earn to continue its brutal war against Ukraine,” said Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in a news release.

“By taking this action in a targeted and responsible manner, we will reduce Russia’s earnings while protecting our partners and allies from unwanted spillover effects,” she said.

The officials said new Russian metals will not be allowed to be traded on the exchanges, including the London Metal Exchange and Chicago Mercantile Exchange. However, metals produced before midnight Saturday in London will be permitted.

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and EU have levied sanctions on Russia’s biggest banks and its elite, frozen the assets of the country’s Central Bank located outside the country and excluded its financial institutions from the SWIFT bank messaging system.

The U.S. and U.K. have also previously sanctioned Russian gold, gas and diamonds.

Judge declines to delay Trump’s NY hush money trial over complaints of pretrial publicity

posted in: Politics | 0

NEW YORK (AP) — The judge in Donald Trump’s hush money criminal case on Friday turned down the former president’s request to postpone his trial because of publicity about the case.

It’s the latest in a string of delay denials that Trump has gotten from various courts this week as he fights to stave off the trial’s start Monday with jury selection.

Among other things, Trump’s lawyers had argued that the jury pool was deluged with what the defense saw as “exceptionally prejudicial” news coverage of the case. The defense argued that was a reason to hold off the case indefinitely.

Judge Juan M. Merchan said that idea was “not tenable.”

Trump “appears to take the position that his situation and this case are unique and that the pre-trial publicity will never subside. However, this view does not align with reality,” the judge wrote.

He said questioning of prospective jurors would address any concerns about their ability to be fair and impartial.

Prosecutors had objected to Trump’s request, saying that the publicity wasn’t likely to wane and that Trump’s own comments generated a lot of it. Prosecutors also noted that there are over 1 million people in Manhattan and said jury questioning could surely locate 12 who could be impartial.

Trump’s lawyers had lobbed other, sometimes similar, arguments for delays at an appeals court this week. All were turned down by individual appellate judges, though the matters are headed to a panel of appeals judges for further consideration.

Trump’s hush money case is the first of his four criminal indictments slated to go to trial and would be the first criminal trial ever of a former president.

Trump is accused of doctoring his company’s records to hide the real reason for payments to his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, who helped the candidate bury negative claims about him during his 2016 campaign. Cohen’s activities included paying porn actor Stormy Daniels $130,000 to suppress her story of an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump years earlier, which Trump denies.

Trump pushes Arizona lawmakers to ‘remedy’ state abortion ruling that he says ‘went too far’

posted in: Politics | 0

By JONATHAN J. COOPER Associated Press

TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) — Former President Donald Trump urged Arizona lawmakers on Friday to swiftly “remedy” the state Supreme Court ruling allowing prosecutors to enforce a near—total abortion ban that he declared anew “went too far.”

Trump has repeatedly expressed pride in his role in overturning the national constitutional right to an abortion by appointing three conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court during his one term as president. However, his messaging in the aftermath of the Arizona ruling that a ban on the books since 1864 is constitutional illustrates his struggle to neutralize what has become a potent political weapon for Democrats.

His comments Friday came hours before Vice President Kamala Harris was to speak about abortion rights in Tucson. President Joe Biden and his allies blame Trump for sharply curtailing abortion access, and the issue has become a major liability for the former president in one of the handful of swing states that could decide the November election.

Trump’s demand for the state to ease its abortion law came just days after he said abortion rights should be left to the states to decide. At the time he added: “and whatever they decide must be the law of the land — in this case, the law of the state.”

On Friday, he struck a firm note on what the state must decide.

“The Governor and the Arizona Legislature must use HEART, COMMON SENSE, and ACT IMMEDIATELY, to remedy what has happened,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, his social media platform. “Remember, it is now up to the States and the Good Will of those that represent THE PEOPLE.”

He did not call for a specific course of action, such as repealing or watering down the law. He did say that “ideally” abortion restrictions should include exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother.

“Arizona Legislature, please act as fast as possible!” Trump wrote.

Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs has called for the repeal of the abortion ban, and a handful of Republican legislators from battleground districts have supported that move. But the Republican majority in the state House shut down an attempted repeal on Monday amid shouts from Democrats of “Shame! Shame!”

The Legislature’s most vocal critics of repealing the law are among the body’s most devoted Trump supporters.

Under pressure over his role in eliminating the constitutional right to abortion, Trump tried to chart a middle course on Monday, releasing a video in which he said he proudly paved the way for the court’s decision and that the matter should be left to states. He declined to endorse a national ban.

But the Arizona Supreme Court ruling the next day showed what can happen when the issue is left to states. The Arizona ruling paves the way for enforcement of a law first passed in 1864, which allows for the imprisonment of abortion providers at any stage of pregnancy unless the mother’s life is at risk. It does not include exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest.

“Nothing he says can undo the chaos and cruelty his actions have inflicted on women across America,” Sarafina Chitika, a Biden campaign spokesperson, said Friday in response to Trump’s latest comments.

Arizona voters backed Biden in 2020 by fewer than 11,000 votes, just the second time in seven decades that the state voted for a Democrat, and both Trump and Biden see the state as a crucial battleground again this year.

According to AP VoteCast, a broad survey of the electorate, 61% of Arizona voters in the 2022 midterm elections said abortion should be legal in most or all cases. Just 6% said it should be illegal in all cases.

Two-thirds of midterm voters in Arizona said the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade was an important factor for their vote in that election.

About 6 in 10 Arizona voters in that election said they would favor a law guaranteeing access to legal abortion nationwide.